Each person will take a unique perspective when they read your research paper. Sometimes this can feel frustrating, yet I have learned that it is so important to take a step back and accept constructive feedback. You will never have all of the answers and it is essential that you are willing to learn and grow from others.

To be recognized with an award by other academics that I respect and admire is incredibly humbling. In some ways it doesn’t feel “right” because you know your paper can always improve. However, as Professor Amy Dunbar once told me, you have to celebrate your achievements, no matter how big or small.

The AAA-Northeast Conference Best Doctoral Student Paper award is given based on the Conference Committee’s selection as the overall best paper submitted to the conference that is solo authored by a PhD student. At the time of my submission to the conference, my paper, “The Cost of Misaligned Tax Incentives: Evidence from Tax-Motivated Special Dividends” was based on my second year qualifying paper (since updated to include Steven Utke as a co-author). It felt surreal to find out that I was selected for this award, particularly since this was my first major project where I worked from idea to execution. The Northeast conference is attended by students from excellent universities, so it was truly an honor to receive this award and it was a helpful reminder that I can do research at the caliber that is necessary for my career aspirations. Of course, I am extraordinarily indebted to my paper advisor, Steven Utke, and my qualifying paper committee members, Todd Kravet and David Weber. Their guidance and support throughout this project was invaluable and is a testament to the research environment that is fostered within UConn’s Accounting department.

Now that I am past my comprehensive exam, my primary goal is to continue to move my projects through the publication process and – of course – graduate. I have never felt like I’m “working” when I work on my research, so naturally my dream is to place at a research-intensive university to be able to continue doing what I love to do.

In pursuit of this opportunity, I was rejected from nine but earned offers from three, strong Ph.D. programs. I highlight the rejections to illustrate that it is not unusual to receive one in this competitive field. Fortunately, UConn was one of my top choices as I believed and still believe it to be a strong fit for me. It was important to me that the Ph.D. program I chose to commit five rigorous years to, conducted research in areas that I am passionate about. So, I searched for programs that had multiple faculty members with whom I shared similar research interests. Almost equally important to me was that I felt a positive connection with the faculty members whether they would fill the role as my advisors, mentors, or colleagues. Based on my positive experiences at SFSU, I knew that I needed faculty that were approachable but also authentic and challenging. I also looked for evidence that I might enjoy my peers’ company and collaborate with them on research projects. In short, UConn met all of these criteria. In fact, its program generates not only strong, but also important research in leadership and teams; is composed of leading faculty members; and supports outstanding graduate students. At this point, I came to the conclusion that every mile away from home would be worth my while at UConn.

Now that I am at UConn it is funny to reflect on the research proposal I wrote prior to my acceptance. To be frank, identifying and communicating my research interests is still a work in progress. I want to be authentic in saying this because it is quite common that Ph.D. students propose a topic coming into the program that they later discover is too broad or is not in the area that they want to continue pursuing. For example, my research proposal to UConn reflected my broad interests and experiences in researching teams as well as women in leadership. This proposal has now shifted with more experiences in the program and after learning that accurately developing a research question that can contribute a compelling and important story is difficult. Over the years, I have discovered that I am primarily interested in how leadership functions as a system of effectiveness in teams as well as how leaders navigate different events in organizations. Although I am still fine-tuning my research stream, this is all to say that the research proposal process prior to a Ph.D. program is often generally representative of broader interests and experiences and may improve over time.

My ability to improve my research questions have been largely influenced by the management professors that have shaped my experiences at UConn. During my early interviews with my advisors, they expressed that they would cultivate the opportunities for me to succeed, but that it would be up to me to deliver on it. I held those words closely because this is exactly what my undergraduate professor had asked of me and its paid nothing but dividends. Both of my advisors, as wells as other faculty in the management department, have lived up to this statement by providing me with a generous amount of unique opportunities. Despite some of them not specializing in women leaders, they still supported my initial curiosity in this pursuit which showed me that they care about my personal exploration and development. To this day, I am grateful to have had rare experiences in my research journey with leadership, such as speaking with high-ranking women officers in the military as well as working with field data in the context of surgical and NASA astronaut teams.